On 7/7/2012 10:23, Lee Lofaso -> John Massey wrote:   
      
    LL>>> Is access to affordable health care a human right?   
      
    JM>> No.   
      
    LL> Most of the world says it is.   
      
   Most of the world saying it is, are the one who are not paying for it.   
      
      
    LL>>> According to the most widely accepted international LL>human rights   
    JM>> treaties, it is.   
      
    JM>> Then the treaties are wrong.   
      
    LL> The US is a signatory to those treaties.   
      
    JM>> Medical care is a commodity.   
      
    LL> The right to life is an unalienable right, not a commodity.   
    LL> Having no access to quality health care is a death sentence.   
    LL> Therefore, your premise is wrong.   
      
   The right to life is a right. The medical expertise and everything else  used   
   in modern day medical practice used to extend that life is a commodity   
      
      
    JM>> You can not receive that care unless some one else provides   
    JM>> it to you.   
      
    LL> Our "health care for profit" system should be scrapped.   
      
   And replaced with what? You will still have the same problems.   
      
      
    LL>  The sooner,   
    LL> the better.  Life itself is a right,   not a commodity.  And we should   
    LL> do all in our power to protect that life.   
      
   So far so good.   
      
    LL> Not benefit from somebody   
    LL> else's misfortune of getting sick.  For those who cannot afford to   
    LL> pay for access to quality health care, it is imperative for society   
    LL> (taxpayers) to pick up the tab.  It is the least we can do.   
      
   It's the least YOU can do. I can do a lot less and you do not have the right   
   to tax me to help pay for anyone elese's anymore than I can beat the hell out   
   of someone and call it free speech.   
      
    JM>> What about that persons right to be compensated for ther service   
    JM>> or product?   
      
    LL> Should doctors be compensated for their service?  Absolutely.  But   
    LL> how much compensation is enough?   
      
   Shouldn't that be between the doctor and the patient?   
      
    LL> Should a heart or brain surgeon be   
    LL> paid megabucks for performing a 15-minute operation, whan a far lesser   
    LL> amount but be more than sufficient?   
      
   Who gets to decide what is sufficient?  It should be the Doctor   
      
    JM>> If you believe  you have a "right" to "free" health care , you must   
    JM>> think it's OK to rob someone else to pay for it.   
      
    LL> Where did I say that doctors and nurses and other health professionals   
    LL> should not be given fair compensation for their work?   
      
   Nowhere, you just want to tell them how much they can make   
      
   The problem is you have never said where you are going to get the money to pay   
   for it all.   
      
      
      
    LL> Taxpayers can   
    LL> pick up the tab for those who cannot afford to pay.   
      
   No they can't, It will bankrupt the Country.   
    Doctors and nurses   
    LL> and other health professionals, along with insurance companies and   
    LL> pharmaceutical companies, do not have to be so goddamn greedy at   
    LL> the expense of other's misfortune.   
      
   And you are the one to tell them, ALL OF THEM just how much money they are   
   allowed to make? How un-american is that idea, where I have always been told   
   the sky is the limit if you work hard and smart enough   
      
    It is a racket, blessed by our   
    LL> nation's politicians.   
      
    LL>>> For example -   
      
    LL>>> Article 25 of the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)   
    LL>>> reads quite clearly and emphatically:   
      
    LL>>> Everyone has the right to A STANDARD OF LIVING ADEQUATE FOR THE   
    LL> HEALTH   
    LL>>> AND WELL-BEING OF HIMSELF AND OF HIS FAMILY, including food,   
    LL> clothing,   
    LL>>> housing and MEDICAL CARE and necessary social services, and the   
    LL> right   
    LL>>> to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability,   
    JM>> widowhood,   
    LL>>> old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his   
    LL>>> control.   
      
    LL>>> Do you know what that means?  THE WORLD OWES ME A LIVING!   
      
    JM>> No it means theose people that came up with a wonderful utopian idea   
    JM>> that will never work. You may think the world owes you a living but   
    JM>> the people on it do not.   
      
    LL> The right to life is an unalienable right,   
      
   The right to life is a right. The medical expertise and everything else  used   
   in modern day medical practice used to extend or save that life is a commodity.   
      
    LL> There are also other unalienable rights, none of which are commodities.   
    LL> If a man is starving, and you had food available, would you let him   
    LL> starve?   
      
   Most likely not but if it is my food that I worked for or grew, just because   
   someone else is hungry does not give a right to my stuff.   
      
      
    LL> Offering to sell him an apple at a price he could not afford   
    LL> would be akin to murder.  Are you a murderer?  Is that what you think   
    LL> our society is, or should be?  A bunch of murderers?   
      
   I think you are being a tad mellow dramatic.   
      
    LL> Some people deserve to get something for nothing.  Especially   
    LL> those people who are in dire need, such as starving masses begging   
    LL> for food.  Not that anybody should ever have to beg.  Especially   
    LL> in this land of plenty.   
      
    LL>>> month.  Isn't that great?  Now he is giving us free health care.   
    LL> Just   
    LL>>> as he had promised.  And you are complaining?   
      
    JM>> It only free to the mucher class, it's not free to those of us   
    JM>> paying for it.   
      
    LL> We (society) can afford to help those who cannot help themselves.   
    LL> And so we should.   
      
   Only to a point and we passed that point a long time  ago.   
      
      
     In fact, we (society) have a duty and an obligation   
    LL> to do so, as stated under the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8.   
      
    LL>>> I'm telling you, man.  With Obama, everything gonna be free.   
    LL>>> And I'm not talking about just cell phones and food stamps.   
    LL>>> I'm talking free medical care, free housing, free you name it.   
      
    LL>>> Anyway, back to the main topic -   
      
    LL>>> Article 12 of the U.N. International Covenant on Economic,   
    LL> Social, and   
    LL>>> Cultural Rights (1966) also mentions access to quality healthcare   
    LL> as a   
    LL>>> human right, plus a few other things.   
      
    JM>> SO WHAT? There is no UN plan to pay for the freeloaders, except to   
    JM>> tax the U.S. and that power is NOT subject to ANY UN treaty.   
      
    LL> You really should read the U.S. Constitution.  Especially Article VI.   
      
    LL>>> The United States is a signatory to both treaties, as well as   
    LL>>> several other international treaties dealing with human rights.   
    LL>>> Therefore, access to quality healthcare is an accepted part of   
    LL>>> the American understanding of human rights.   
      
    JM>> Bull   
      
    LL> Feel free to view the list of nations that have signed the treaties.   
    LL> The US is among them.  And while you're at it, don't forget to view   
    LL> Executive Order 13107, Implementation of Human Rights Treaties, signed   
    LL> by President Bill Clinton on December 10, 1998.   
      
      
   Lee I would not care if JC appeared and said it was a right. I would   
   still say he's wrong and would refuse to be taxed for it.   
      
   --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.   
    * Origin: Fidonet Via Newsreader - http://www.easternstar.info (1:123/789.0)